Brewer Comments on ACLU Joining Firm as Co-Counsel in First Amendment Supreme Court Case
December 11, 2023 – Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors joins the National Rifle Association of America (NRA) in welcoming the ACLU as co-counsel in the NRA’s First Amendment case against former New York State financial regulator Maria T. Vullo.
The Brewer firm has represented the NRA in this matter since its inception, and the United States Supreme Court accepted the case for review on November 3, 2023.
The case has become among the most closely watched First Amendment cases in the country.
As reported by The New York Times, “…when the Supreme Court agreed to hear the NRA’s free speech challenge to what it said were a New York official’s efforts to blacklist it, one of the lawyers had a bold idea. Why not ask the ACLU to represent it before justices?”
“The NRA might be thought of as the 800-pound gorilla on the Second Amendment…clearly, the ACLU is the 800-pound gorilla on the First Amendment,” firm partner Bill Brewer told the Times.
Brewer stated today, “We look forward to collaborating with the ACLU, Eugene Volokh, and others on this advocacy team. These lawyers and dozens of amici speak to the importance of the NRA’s case and sends a powerful message to New York State regulators: the NRA will always defend its right to free speech.”
Joining Brewer in representing the NRA are ACLU Legal Director David Cole, attorney Eugene Volokh, firm partner Sarah B. Rogers and firm counsel Noah B. Peters.
New York Times Reports on NRA First Amendment Case, ACLU Joins Brewer as Co-Counsel
December 9, 2023 - The New York Times reported today on the ACLU joining the Brewer firm as co-counsel in the NRA’s First Amendment case against former New York State financial regulator Maria T. Vullo.
The case has become among the most closely watched First Amendment cases in the country. The United States Supreme Court agreed to hear the case on November 3, 2023.
As reported, “…when the Supreme Court agreed to hear the NRA’s free speech challenge to what it said were a New York official’s efforts to blacklist it, one of the lawyers had a bold idea. Why not ask the ACLU to represent it before justices?”
“The NRA might be thought of as the 800-pound gorilla on the Second Amendment…clearly, the ACLU is the 800-pound gorilla on the First Amendment,” firm partner William Brewer told the Times.
Joining Brewer in representing the NRA are ACLU Legal Director David Cole, attorney Eugene Volokh, firm partner Sarah B. Rogers and firm counsel Noah B. Peters.
Read MORE.
Bloomberg Law Reports on Sexual Harassment Lawsuit
November 13, 2023 – Bloomberg Law reports that former Polsinelli PC attorney Julia Rix urged a federal judge to allow her sexual harassment suit against the law firm to proceed.
Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors represents Rix. According to an opposition filing by Rix in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, the dismissal motion by the firm and alleged harasser Gabriel Dabiri is a “desperate bid” to avoid “public scrutiny” of her claims of sexual harassment and retaliation, and an effort to avoid local human rights laws.
The firm and Dabiri “will be forced to contend with the misconduct alleged and their failure to investigate it properly,” William A. Brewer III, Rix’s attorney, added in a statement. “Rix believes the record—replete with late night overtures and sexual advances, followed by blatantly retaliatory actions—speaks for itself.”
To read more, click here.
Insurance Journal Reports on Supreme Court Hearing NRA Case
November 6, 2023 – The Insurance Journal reported today on the U.S. Supreme Court agreeing to hear the NRA’s First Amendment case against former New York Department of Financial Services Superintendent Maria Vullo.
As reported, “The NRA has claimed that former New York Department of Financial Services Superintendent Maria T. Vullo infringed its First Amendment rights when she spoke out against gun violence and issued a press release and guidance letters urging banks and insurance companies in New York to consider not doing business with gun groups including the NRA.”
The NRA was appealing a 2022 ruling by the New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which said Vullo's actions did not constitute unlawful conduct. The appeals court ruling "gives state officials free rein to financially blacklist their political opponents," the NRA's lawyers said in court papers.
The NRA’s lawyer, William A. Brewer, said the NRA is ready to argue its case before the Supreme Court.
“We are grateful the Supreme Court will review this First Amendment case and excited by the opportunity to argue to the Court that a government regulator cannot take adverse action against its political enemies,” said Brewer in a statement. “The ruling from the Second Circuit condones public officials having unbridled power to attack those with whom they disagree.”
To read more, click here.
NBC, CNN, and Others Report on Supreme Court Granting Review of NRA Case
November 4, 2023 - NBC News, CNN, The New York Times, The Hill, and other media outlets reported today that the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the NRA's free speech case against Maria Vullo, the former head of the New York State Department of Financial Services.
As reported by NBC, "The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear the National Rifle Association's claim that a New York state official's alleged role in urging companies to end ties with the gun rights group constituted unlawful coercion."
The NRA was appealing a 2022 ruling by the New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which said Vullo's actions did not constitute unlawful conduct. The appeals court ruling "gives state officials free rein to financially blacklist their political opponents," the NRA's lawyers said in court papers.
As reported by The Hill, "In April 2018 — two months after the deadly mass shooting at a Parkland, Fla., high school — Maria Vullo, former superintendent of the New York State Department of Financial Services, urged banks and insurers to consider the “reputational risks” of working with the NRA, according to court filings. The gun rights group filed suit against Vullo and former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D), saying the NRA had “suffered tens of millions of dollars in damages” due to the officials’ “blacklisting” of the group in violation of their First Amendment rights.
The Brewer firm has represented the NRA in this matter since 2018.
Speaking of today's developments, Brewer partner William A. Brewer III said, "We are grateful the Supreme Court will review this First Amendment case and eager to argue to the Court that government officials who take adverse action against their political enemies do so at their own risk. The ruling from the Second Circuit, which the Court will review, condones public officials having unbridled power to attack those with whom they disagree. Lawyers live for these moments: the opportunity to advocate for clients on their most important matters – on the biggest stage.”
See below to read more:
“Supreme Court takes up NRA coercion claim against former New York official,” NBC
“Supreme Court to hear NRA’s claim a New York agency coerced businesses to drop ties to gun rights group,” CNN
“Supreme Court to Hear N.R.A.’s Free Speech Case Against New York Official,” The New York Times
“Supreme Court to hear NRA free speech lawsuit against NY official,” The Hill
Brewer Firm Achieves Step Forward for NRA and Free Speech with Supreme Court Decision to Hear Case
New York, New York. November 3, 2023 – Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors announced today that the Supreme Court accepted the case National Rifle Association of America v. Maria T. Vullo for review. The decision is a landmark development in one of the most closely watched First Amendment cases in decades.
“We are grateful the Supreme Court will review this First Amendment case and eager to argue to the Court that government officials who take adverse action against their political enemies do so at their own risk,” says William A. Brewer III, counsel to the NRA. “The ruling from the Second Circuit, which the Court will review, condones public officials having unbridled power to attack those with whom they disagree. Lawyers live for these moments: the opportunity to advocate for clients on their most important matters – on the biggest stage.”
With the Supreme Court granting certiorari in NRA v. Vullo, the court will consider a critical First Amendment issue – whether the government can threaten regulated entities, like banks and insurers, with adverse action should they refuse to "drop" controversial speakers based on their speech. The Brewer firm has represented the NRA on this matter since its inception.
In a May 2018 lawsuit, the NRA alleged that Vullo, at the behest of former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, took aim at the NRA and conspired to use the regulatory power of the New York Department of Financial Services (DFS) to “financially blacklist” the NRA – coercing banks and insurers to cut ties with the Association to suppress its pro-Second Amendment speech. The NRA argues that Vullo’s actions were meant to silence the NRA – using “guidance letters,” backroom threats, and other measures to cause financial institutions to “drop” the Association.
In the trial court, the NRA's First Amendment claims withstood multiple motions to dismiss. But in 2022, after Vullo appealed the trial court’s ruling, the Second Circuit struck down the NRA’s claims. The court ruled that in an era of “enhanced corporate social responsibility,” it was reasonable for New York's financial regulator to warn banks and insurance companies against servicing pro-gun groups based on the supposed “social backlash” against those groups’ advocacy. The court also ruled that Vullo’s guidance – written on her official letterhead and invoking her regulatory powers – was not a directive to the institutions she regulated, but rather a mere expression of her political preferences.
On February 7, 2023, the NRA petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking review of the Second Circuit decision.
The Court granted review on the following question: Does the First Amendment allow a government regulator to threaten regulated entities with adverse regulatory actions if they do business with a controversial speaker, as a consequence of (a) the government’s own hostility to the speaker’s viewpoint or (b) a perceived “general backlash” against the speaker’s advocacy?
“The Second Circuit’s opinion…gives state officials free rein to financially blacklist their political opponents – from gun rights groups, to abortion-rights groups, to environmentalist groups, and beyond,” the NRA states in its petition. The Association argues that the Second Circuit erroneously opened the door to unrestrained harassment of advocacy groups by state officials, and seeks to have it closed.
Brewer engineered a legal and public advocacy campaign that included the filing of seven amicus briefs representing 40 individuals and organizations in support of the NRA.
The amicus briefs include those from state attorney generals from Montana and 17 other states, in addition to a brief filed jointly by Texas and Indiana. Various business and legal scholars, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) and the Gun Owners of America, among others, also submitted briefs.
Unfortunately, this is not the first time state officials have leveraged their regulatory power to suppress a disfavored civil rights organization or choke off disfavored speech. The NRA's petition to the Court emphasizes a long line of First Amendment cases – from seminal decisions involving the NAACP in 1958, to the Supreme Court's storied Bantam Books decision in 1963 – that forbid such tactics.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has voiced its support for the NRA.
In August 2018, ACLU Legal Director David Cole wrote that, “…they [New York public officials] cannot use their regulatory authority to penalize advocacy groups by threatening companies that do business with those groups. And here the state has admitted, in its own words, that it focused on the NRA and other groups not because of any illegal conduct, but because they engage in ‘gun promotion’ – in other words, because they advocate a lawful activity.” The ACLU wrote that dismissing the NRA’s case “would set a dangerous precedent for advocacy groups across the political spectrum. Public officials would have a readymade playbook for abusing their regulatory power to harm disfavored advocacy groups without triggering judicial scrutiny.”
Eugene Volokh joins Brewer in representing the NRA, along with Brewer Partner Sarah B. Rogers and firm counsel Noah Peters.
Brewer Firm Featured in Law 360 Profile
November 2, 2023 – Brewer partner William A. Brewer III was part of a “meet the attorneys” profile in Law 360. The article comments on Brewer and senior associates Will Brewer IV and Samantha Daniels, all representing client Julia Rix in her lawsuit against the Polsinelli law firm and two firm partners. The profile explores background information about the Brewer firm, its compensation structure, and work in the philanthropic arena.
With respect to the Rix matter, the article says, “Julia I. Rix sued Polsinelli in September, alleging two older, married senior partners ‘insisted on late-night rendezvous, communicated their sexual interest in her and forced unwanted physical intimacy. An international corporate attorney, she says she was fired without cause after reporting the alleged misconduct to the head of human resources.”
To read more, click here.
Law 360: NRA Tells Justices AG's Probe Basis Needs More Inquiry
October 19, 2023 – Law 360 reported today on emerging developments in the case by the New York Attorney General against the National Rifle Association of America (NRA).
According to the reporting, Brewer counsel “Noah Peters told the Appellate Division, First Department, that a judge got it wrong when he dismissed the NRA's claim that the attorney general's political statements were the motivating force behind her civil financial fraud action accusing the NRA's leaders of funneling millions of dollars into their own pockets. The nonprofit has said James flaunted her hatred of the organization while campaigning in 2018. She won election that November.”
The June 2022 dismissal would "essentially insulate any retaliatory action undertaken by the attorney general so long as the attorney general could later point to some probable cause for her action," Peters told the four justices.
Read the article here.